That little white lie - Rasmussen ...

Support | Event Directors & Organizers

Search Cool Running Community

Browse Cool Running

CoolRunning.com > Cool Running Community > Clubhouse >

Up to Threads in Clubhouse

31 Replies Last post: Nov 20, 2007 11:27 AM by willmary 1 2 3 Previous Next

willmary

204 posts since
May 2, 2003

Dec 17, 2007 10:26 AM

That little white lie - Rasmussen

Rasmussen's Pre-emptive Stike[/URL" target="_blank">

The results of Rabobank's investigation to be announced Monday.

Edited b/c I forgot the backslash, again. That looks much better now.

http://This message has been edited by willmary (edited Nov-09-2007).

DogMom1st

475 posts since
Aug 14, 2007

1. Nov 12, 2007 7:59 AM

in response to: willmary

Re: That little white lie - Rasmussen

And Rabobank fires back [/URL" target="_blank">

Rabobank report: Rasmussen purposely lied

Michael Rasmussen purposely lied about his whereabouts in the period before the Tour de France, making himself unavailable for doping controls, an independent committee announced on Monday in Utrecht, Holland. Rabobank Team Manager Theo de Rooij was right to remove the cyclist from the race, it said, but he should never have started in the first place. The 33 year-old Dane was sent home following stage 16 to the Col d'Aubisque.

The committee also rejected Rasmussen's claim that he lied for personal reasons, saying "it does not deem this explanation to be credible."

The sponsor Rabobank asked the independent committee to investigate "the events and facts before, during and briefly after the Tour de France '07."

In April, when there were already suspicions concerning the Danish rider, the team sent him an e-mail concerning tickets for a training period in the Pyrénées, according to Telesport.nl. He responded that he would like for that trip to be kept "quiet," because he would say that he was in Mexico at that time. De Rooij told the rider that he would not participate in such a cover-up and that Rasmussen would have to supply the correct information to the UCI. "The responsibility for this lies completely on you," de Rooij said in an e-mail.

The committee further found that the team's Board of Directors and its Chairman de Rooij "did not adequately assess the importance of multiple signs concerning Rasmussen's conduct prior to the Tour '07," and failed to properly notify the team's supervisory board of the true state of affairs. In so doing, "the Executive Board endangered the reputation of both Rabo Cycling Teams and the Rabobank." De Rooij resigned his position in August.

The report added, "The Committee has not, however, until now been presented with any evidence that would suggest unethical conduct or a lack of integrity on the part of the cycling team's Board of Directors or medical supervision staff."

The International Cycling Union (UCI) also came in for a share of criticism in the report, which said that "The UCI must attain a higher level of professionalism with regard to the formulation, enforcement and monitoring of its own doping regulations."

In addition, the report recommended that the team improve its own whereabouts notification program.

In a statement issued Monday, sponsor Rabobank said that it agreed with the report and noted that "the main conclusion of the report is that Rasmussen was rightly expelled from the competition and later dismissed. He demonstrably lied about and tampered with his whereabouts. There is no evidence that Rasmussen used doping."

Referring to de Rooij, it added "serious errors of judgement were clearly made, primarily by the Chairman of the Board of Directors. When viewed from this perspective, the Chairman's decision shortly after the Tour to accept responsibility for the consequences ensuing from the resulting crisis is a respectable one.

"It is patently obvious from the information known now that Rasmussen should not have been allowed to start in the Tour de France," the bank's statement noted.

A full report on the independent committee's findings will follow on Cyclingnews.

willmary

204 posts since
May 2, 2003

2. Nov 12, 2007 8:39 AM

in response to: willmary

Re: That little white lie - Rasmussen

Good morning! You and I were both watching for the Rabobank story this morning.

There were also these stories Friday -- the fall out from Rasmussen's admission that he lied:

UCI to open diciplinary case
The head of the UCI's antidoping unit, Anne Gripper, thinks it possible that Michael Rasmussen faces a two-year suspension for giving false information about his whereabouts in June this year. Confronted with yesterday's statement from Rasmussen while on her way back from a holiday in Australia, she told the Danish news agency Ritzau, "It's good he finally said it."

The antidoping unit had been looking into the case for a while, and they also tried to get a statement from Rasmussen: "I expect we are now going to open a disciplinary case against him. We have been investigating the case and had made several appointments with Rasmussen and his lawyer, but for different reasons they were cancelled. Now a meeting with him has become unnecessary."

Unlike Rasmussen himself, Gripper thinks the existing rules form a basis on which he could be suspended. "In the course of the investigation we have looked at which antidoping rules are relevant in this case. We are going to comment on that this week. After this confession it is likely that we are going to go for a breach of the rule about 'avoiding a test', which generally results in two years' suspension."

Blood values suspicious according to CSC's Damsgaard
The Danish newspaper B.T. showed the blood profiles which Michael Rasmussen published yesterday at his press conference in Hellerup to doping expert Rasmus Damsgaard. He is the man in charge of CSC's antidoping programme.

In his opinion, the blood values are suspicious. During the Tour de France, Rasmussen's haemoglobin values rose, which, according to Damsgaard, is unusual: "The haemoglobin values of the seven CSC riders taking part in the Tour de France dropped by 12 to 22 percent, which is completely normal. That the opposite happens, that the values rise during a hard race like the Tour de France, indicates that there has been a blood transfusion.

"We conclude that an increase in haemoglobin alone should be sanctionable."

Danish federation unhappy
The head of the Danish Cycling Federation (Dansk Cykle Union, DCU), Jesper Worre, is not very pleased with the extent of Michael Rasmussen's statement.

"It's not really much use, since he doesn't elaborate anything at all," he told DR Sporten. "But there is not really any excuse for delivering wrong whereabouts, otherwise the system wouldn't work."

Worre sees Rasmussen's biggest problem, however, in the fact that he lied to the UCI. "He has more than just one credibility issue, for he also has a problem with the UCI which has to open a case. I can't see that they have other options, because he deliberately delivered wrong whereabouts, and that is tampering with where he was," Worre concluded.

willmary

204 posts since
May 2, 2003

3. Nov 12, 2007 8:41 AM

in response to: willmary

Re: That little white lie - Rasmussen

I wonder if Rasmussen will offer a rebuttal.

ctjim

163 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

4. Nov 12, 2007 10:55 AM

in response to: willmary

Re: That little white lie - Rasmussen

If what Rabobank is saying is true, they never should've let Rasmussen start the TdF.

DogMom1st

475 posts since
Aug 14, 2007

5. Nov 12, 2007 11:00 AM

in response to: willmary

Re: That little white lie - Rasmussen

quote:<HR>Originally posted by willmary:
Good morning! You and I were both watching for the Rabobank story this morning.

<HR>

Isn't it amazing how the TdF stories are lingering long after the winners jersey is awarded. It used to be that you didn't hear anything about except a month before and a month after.

quote:<HR>Originally posted by ctjim:
[b]If what Rabobank is saying is true, they never should've let Rasmussen start the TdF. [/B]<HR>

1

And I wonder if the UCI or the ASO will sanction the team in any way.

willmary

204 posts since
May 2, 2003

6. Nov 12, 2007 11:26 AM

in response to: willmary

Re: That little white lie - Rasmussen

I'm a little confused about the sanctioning Team Rabobank could face. ASO was totally ****** at the UCI for letting Rasmussen start. I'm not sure if it's the team's or the UCI's responsibility to keep riders from starting the race. I guess it depends on whether the team knows that he missed tests?

I don't think the ASO can sanction Team Rabobank, but they can sure make sure not to invite them in 2008. Maybe that's the positive side of their leaving the ProTour?

I still like that De Rooij had the backbone to fire him during the tour. But the flip side is he probably shouldn't have let him start and he should have informed the team sponsor of the problem way back in May or June. So is De Rooij the good guy or the bad guy?

willmary

204 posts since
May 2, 2003

7. Nov 13, 2007 10:47 AM

in response to: willmary

Re: That little white lie - Rasmussen

Detailed analysis of the report:
Part I[/URL" target="_blank">
Part II[/URL" target="_blank">

My favorite line:
In its general conclusion, the committee said, "The UCI is insufficiently precise, insufficiently unambiguous, insufficiently coordinated, insufficiently effective and overly random with respect to its formulation and application of its own anti-doping regulations and sanctions measures."

Rusmussen's rebuttal is promised for tomorrow.

ctjim

163 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

8. Nov 13, 2007 10:48 AM

in response to: willmary

Re: That little white lie - Rasmussen

I've been reading the details here:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2007/rasmussen_report_nov071[/URL" target="_blank">

and one thing jumps out at me:
"In response, Rasmussen called De Rooy to say that he wished to keep secret from the press the fact that he was training with team-mate Denis Menchov in the Pyrenees."

If so, Menchov has been oddly silent through this whole mess.

DogMom1st

475 posts since
Aug 14, 2007

9. Nov 13, 2007 11:08 AM

in response to: willmary

Re: That little white lie - Rasmussen

quote:<HR>Originally posted by willmary:
I'm a little confused about the sanctioning Team Rabobank could face. ASO was totally ****** at the UCI for letting Rasmussen start. I'm not sure if it's the team's or the UCI's responsibility to keep riders from starting the race. I guess it depends on whether the team knows that he missed tests?

I don't think the ASO can sanction Team Rabobank, but they can sure make sure not to invite them in 2008. Maybe that's the positive side of their leaving the ProTour?

I still like that De Rooij had the backbone to fire him during the tour. But the flip side is he probably shouldn't have let him start and he should have informed the team sponsor of the problem way back in May or June. So is De Rooij the good guy or the bad guy?<HR>

Sanctioning meaning not allowing the team to ride in races. Or even a financial slap on the wrist.

If the team knew that Rasmussen was not in Mexico and did nothing about it then they should share some of the blame. And of course some of the punishment.

The UCI also should share in some of the blame.

Rasmussen should not have been allowed to ride in the TdF.

quote:<HR>Originally posted by ctjim:
[b] and one thing jumps out at me:
"In response, Rasmussen called De Rooy to say that he wished to keep secret from the press the fact that he was training with team-mate Denis Menchov in the Pyrenees."

If so, Menchov has been oddly silent through this whole mess.

[/B]<HR>

Right.
I'd love to know if he was with Menchov.

willmary

204 posts since
May 2, 2003

10. Nov 13, 2007 12:56 PM

in response to: willmary

Re: That little white lie - Rasmussen

quote:<HR>Originally posted by ctjim:
[b]I've been reading the details here:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2007/rasmussen_report_nov071[/URL" target="_blank">

and one thing jumps out at me:
"In response, Rasmussen called De Rooy to say that he wished to keep secret from the press the fact that he was training with team-mate Denis Menchov in the Pyrenees."

If so, Menchov has been oddly silent through this whole mess.

[/B]<HR>

I remember Rasmussen saying some rather unkind things about Menchov during the tour -- after Menchov had a bad day and the team finally threw all of their support behind Rasmussen -- but I can't find the story. So I don't think their friends but that doesn't explain his silence. Omerta? I wonder where Menchov's reports to the UCI said he would be.

I wonder how many other riders should have been excluded for missed tests or not reporting their location.

ihop

12 posts since
Nov 9, 2001

11. Nov 13, 2007 1:10 PM

in response to: willmary

Re: That little white lie - Rasmussen

This is all very interesting. I really wonder what the team management knew about his whereabouts. If they were in the loop then they should be sanctioned. He never should have been allowed to start.

And intriguing about Menchov (Chicken trained with him but he still couldn't get his *** over the mountain...) but it makes me wonder who else was there, if anyone, and if this situation has been the norm with this team and with others. How many team directors/managers have been complicit in this sort of thing? Or is this just a unique situation?

willmary

204 posts since
May 2, 2003

12. Nov 14, 2007 8:49 AM

in response to: willmary

Re: That little white lie - Rasmussen

quote:<HR>Originally posted by ihop:
This is all very interesting. I really wonder what the team management knew about his whereabouts. If they were in the loop then they should be sanctioned. He never should have been allowed to start.

And intriguing about Menchov (Chicken trained with him but he still couldn't get his *** over the mountain...) but it makes me wonder who else was there, if anyone, and if this situation has been the norm with this team and with others. How many team directors/managers have been complicit in this sort of thing? Or is this just a unique situation?<HR>

The detailed report in cyclingnews (the report on the report

) said that the team manager De Rooij had traded e-mails with Rasmussen in connection with making plane or room reservations to check out the mountain stages where Rasmussen said he would report to the UCI he would be in Mexico. De Rooij e-mailed him back that that was Rasmussen's business and he didn't want to have anything to do with it.

So De Rooij knew and that's why he resigned -- or was forced to resign. They concluded he should have notified the rest of the team's management about this as well as the team sponsor. The rest of the team management denies knowing anything about it and there is no evidence to prove they knew anything.

And I'm with you. This really makes me wonder who else was involved, who else was doing something similar, and who else should not have been allowed to start.

Rasmussen's rebuttal should be interesting.

I also saw that Salvoldelli signed with Team LPR. I don't understand why he's no longer with Astana or another pro tour team. He's won the Giro twice. Is there bad blood between him and Bruyneel? Why wouldn't another ProTour team sign him?

DogMom1st

475 posts since
Aug 14, 2007

13. Nov 14, 2007 10:06 AM

in response to: willmary

Re: That little white lie - Rasmussen

quote:<HR>Originally posted by willmary:

So De Rooij knew and that's why he resigned -- or was forced to resign. They concluded he should have notified the rest of the team's management about this as well as the team sponsor. The rest of the team management denies knowing anything about it and there is no evidence to prove they knew anything.

And I'm with you. This really makes me wonder who else was involved, who else was doing something similar, and who else should not have been allowed to start.

Rasmussen's rebuttal should be interesting.

I also saw that Salvoldelli signed with Team LPR. I don't understand why he's no longer with Astana or another pro tour team. He's won the Giro twice. Is there bad blood between him and Bruyneel? Why wouldn't another ProTour team sign him?<HR>

De Rooij definitely a black hat in this situation. He should have not allowed Rasmussen to tell the UCI he was someplace when he wasn't.
I don't think there were any other Rabobank cyclists there, especially Menchov.

I think there is some bad blood between Bruyneel and Savoldelli. Bruyneel wouldn't support him to take over Armstrong's spot at the TdF in 2006.

willmary

204 posts since
May 2, 2003

14. Nov 15, 2007 8:05 AM

in response to: willmary

Re: That little white lie - Rasmussen

quote:<HR>Originally posted by DogMom:
De Rooij definitely a black hat in this situation. He should have not allowed Rasmussen to tell the UCI he was someplace when he wasn't.
I don't think there were any other Rabobank cyclists there, especially Menchov.

I think there is some bad blood between Bruyneel and Savoldelli. Bruyneel wouldn't support him to take over Armstrong's spot at the TdF in 2006.<HR>

It seems like there's bad blood. However, that doesn't explain why another ProTour team didn't pick up his contract. Inqiring minds want to know.

The rebuttal.[/URL" target="_blank">

Most interesting quotes:
"We have two options," the Dane said in a press statement issued yesterday. "Either we come to an agreement or I go to court. I have already waited 100 days without an answer." Rasmussen's lawyer contested the committee's finding that the team did not know the whereabouts of the 33 year-old during the month of June, calling this "absurd", according to HLN.

Especially the fact that Rasmussen apparently tried to convince members of his wife's family in Mexico to fake letters to prove he was there, astounded Lund. "That is condemnable, if professional cycling is calling for credibility," he said.

But there are also other possibilities: "It is also possible that I get a check which means that I simply won't have to work any more. There are many scenarios," Rasmussen said.

Go to original post 1 2 3 Previous Next

Go to original post

Dec 17, 2007 10:26 AM

That little white lie - Rasmussen

Actions

More Like This

New Runners

Training

Competition

Age Groups

Fitness

The Lighter Side

Feedback

Related Links